The title of this article is taken from John Piper’s video in which he explained why he invited Rick Warren to speak at the 2010 Desiring God conference. In two stages, the obvious and the scriptural, I will help John Piper “to know why [he] should feel bad about this decision” and to repent of it.

I. What are the Obvious Reasons?

A. Warren embraces deliberate pragmatism of the worst kind:He believes that anyone one can be reached based on “finding the key to that person's heart.” Therefore, the unbelieving community sets the agenda for his church: Warren says, “We let the unchurched needs determine our programs; the unchurched hang-ups determine our strategy; the unchurched culture determine our style; the unchurched population determine our goals.” (PD website)

B. Warren routinely misuses ScriptureThe Bible is a tool that Warren manipulates to cover his own ideas with a veneer of divine authority. For example, in the Purpose Driven Life he quotes from 15 Bible versions and paraphrases, picking and choosing the one that fits his pragmatic need. This process often wrenches texts out of context.

C. Warren is guilty of serious theological reductionism:He discounts the value of a well-rounded system of doctrine and even considers doctrine an obstacle to unity. On his Purpose Driven website he lists his doctrinal statement that any Bible college graduate would find completely inadequate. His doctrine of theology proper is the following: “God is bigger and better and closer than we can imagine.” That’s it for the doctrine of God. It is so insufficient one could say that it falls short of an adequate understanding of the Christian concept of God the Father.D. Warren promotes extreme ecumenism:He has forged ties with the Roman Catholic Church, the Baptist World Alliance and the United Nations. Warren is involved with and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Warren said, “I see absolutely zero reason in separating my fellowship from anybody,” Noting he has theological differences with many of the diverse denominations that invite him to speak, Warren added, “That doesn’t stop me from fellowshipping with them.” When he heard of the SBC’s withdrawal from the Baptist World Alliance, he added, “I thought, ‘This is silly! Why would we separate ourselves from brothers and sisters in the world?’” (Rick Warren, Global Baptists Are in This Together.) Warren signing the Yale Center for Faith and Culture1 document for unity among Christian and Muslim faiths.

E. Warren redefines ministry in terms of social activism:Alan Wolfe of the Wall Street Journal says, “Historians are likely to pinpoint Mr. Warren’s trip to Rwanda as the moment when conservative evangelical Protestantism made questions of social justice central to its concerns.” Warren’s Global Peace Plan for “Purpose Driven Nations” includes involving himself with the UN, Council on Foreign Relations, etc. in order to rid the world of “poverty, disease, and illiteracy” by forming entangling alliances between churches, secular businesses, and governments. This is an agenda completely foreign to and for Warren replaces the Great Commission and the New Testament church as laid out in Acts and the Pauline Epistles. Through his cooperative efforts, Warren aligns himself with the same UN that seeks to “rid the world” of unborn infants through their murder while still in the womb.

F. Warren justifies cultural capitulation by embracing anti-God cultural norms:A notable example of this occurred when Warren sang the Jimi Hendrix song, “Purple Haze,” during the 25th anniversary celebration service of Saddleback Church. Most recently Warren hosted the Jonas Brothers (boy band) for Saddleback’s 30th anniversary celebration and Easter Sunday service. [Editor’s Note: With Piper hosting a RAP artist at his church and MacArthur featuring Christian Rock-n-Roll bands at his Resolved conference this from Warren may be unworthy of notice for them.]

G. Warren propagates some the worst soteriological reductionism:“Wherever you are reading this, I invite you to bow your head and quietly whisper the prayer that will change your eternity: ‘Jesus, I believe in you and receive you.’ If you sincerely meant that prayer, congratulations! Welcome to the family of God!” (PDL, p. 74).

Brother Piper, are these not enough to help you know why you “should feel bad about this decision” and repent of it?

Maybe they aren’t. So...

II. What are the Scriptural Reasons?

“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple,” (Rom. 16:17-18).

“Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us…. And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother,” (2 Thess. 3:6; 14-15).

In regard to Rick Warren the mandates in verse 17 apply and there is no subjective decision to make about it. Piper, however, chose to ignore the Scriptures to embrace Rick Warren, to defend and give him recognition, which will lend credibility to Warren and his methods. Piper puts impressionable believers, who follow him (Piper) at risk. Piper offers Warren a national platform, which could through his, “good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple,” draw away disciples (Acts 20:30) and lead to their spiritual demise.

What Piper has done is inexcusable! His action is a blatant disregard for 2 Thessalonians 3:6. Piper’s invite of Rick Warren, apart from his repentance from it, IMO numbers him among the disobedient. The Scriptures have an application to and mandate the believer’s response to Piper just as they do to Rick Warren.In his classic Dr. Ernest Pickering wrote:

“When our brethren do things that are wrong—caused by an incomplete knowledge of or deliberate disobedience to some teaching of Scripture—we should not merely continue fellowship with them as those who have done nothing wrong, but we should warn them, remonstrate with them and seek to recover them to a Biblical position. . . . If one should ask, Does 2 Thessalonians 3 teach secondary separation?—then the response would have to be given, It depends on what you mean by secondary separation. . . . It is the principle of refusing to condone, honor or utilize persons who continually and knowingly are following a course of action which is harmful to other believers and to the welfare of the churches.”2

Pay close attention to that the final sentence from Dr. Pickering’s excerpt (see bold). It, “secondary separation,” can be appropriately applied to both Rick Warren and now John Piper because both are, “following a course of action which is harmful to other believers and to the welfare of the churches.”

For the sake of a convergence around Calvinism and the Lordship Salvation3 interpretation of the Gospel men in evangelical and some in fundamental circles will tolerate, allow for, ignore and/or excuse Piper’s unwillingness to separate from those he knows to be in biblical error, i.e., “open theists” within his denomination; thinking the Toronto Blessing is a blessing; RAP in his church and his embrace of Mark Driscoll in spite of his (Driscoll’s) disgraceful speech and speaking at Schuler’s Crystal Cathedral. Not even this present indefensible error with Rick Warren, which violates the mandates of Scripture, is enough to “withdraw from” and caution others to refrain from promoting the ministry of John Piper.

What men won’t acknowledge, due to their fear of labeling, is that John Piper is a New-Evangelical.

“Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them,” (Acts 20:28-31).

Hobnobbing with unbelievers through the Manhattan Declaration opens the door for “grievous wolves [to] enter in among you.” Furthermore, “of our own selves” men, such as Rick Warren, have arisen “speaking perverse things.” Al Mohler and Ligon Duncan have given Christian recognition to the deadly “enemies of the cross of Christ,” (Phil. 3:18). 4 John Piper is giving a platform, his own, for the “perverse things” of Rick Warren.

Yet none of these issues are sufficient motivation for men who claim fidelity to the Scriptures, including biblical separatism, to obey the biblical mandates to “withdraw from,” to “mark” and “avoid,” to warn others also.

Numerous blog articles have been generated since I first published (March 30, 2010) confirmation of John Piper’s invitation to Rick Warren to speak at this year’s Desiring God conference.5 John Piper has embraced and subsequently defended Rick Warren. He has demonstrated that he is firm in his decision and shows no inclination to repent of it.

How to Express Christian Love to John Piper:

Every person who attends T4G, who loves John Piper in the Lord, can help John Piper toward repentance. You can do that by admonishing him as openly as he has embraced and defended Rick Warren. If you are convinced that Piper is wrong, and that the Bible mandates our response, then follow that conviction and admonish him. If he refuses to respond and repent, then you have one option if you are to live in fidelity to the biblical mandates: “withdraw yourselves from...have no company with him that he may be ashamed.”

You might ask, “How do I make a practical application of those mandates at T4G?” The most practical application of the principle would be depart the hall when Piper has the platform. On Wednesday evening John Piper has the platform at T4G. That will be your opportunity to show fidelity to the Scriptures by being a no-show in the hall for that session. Radical; maybe, but:

Just where does your first loyalty lie: to the Word of God or to your friends, mentors and fellowships?

John Piper is not an enemy and I do not appreciate those who might portray him as one. He is, however, a brother who has gone horribly wrong in theology and practice with the Warren invite being the latest and most stark example. If members of the body of Christ do not take biblical steps to admonish and withdraw from to restore him he will eventually make even worse decisions than this one with Rick Warren.

If you love John Piper as a brother, you will admonish him as a brother. There is no more loving course of action than to restore a brother who has gone into “contrary” doctrine or practice than to admonish him. If he is unrepentant the loving response is to withdraw from, have no company with, to mark and avoid him.

17 comments:

I wanted to post a comment on the Desiring God site under their article on this. You have written what I was trying to write but could not ever quite get into words when you said:

He discounts the value of a well-rounded system of doctrine and even considers doctrine an obstacle to unity.

And:

Warren said, “I see absolutely zero reason in separating my fellowship from anybody,” Noting he has theological differences with many of the diverse denominations that invite him to speak, Warren added, “That doesn’t stop me from fellowshipping with them.” When he heard of the SBC’s withdrawal from the Baptist World Alliance, he added, “I thought, ‘This is silly! Why would we separate ourselves from brothers and sisters in the world?’” (Rick Warren, Global Baptists Are in This Together.) Warren signing the Yale Center for Faith and Culture1 document for unity among Christian and Muslim faiths.

What I wanted to get to was the idea that Piper was going about deciding on Warren by the wrong means. His whole video is about how Warren is orthodox in his theology. The point I wanted to make was that this doesn't matter because Warren himself renders this consideration irrelevant. He does this precisely by what you said- he considers doctrine not a basis for unity among brethren, but an obstacle to unity with them. Therefore, it is irrelevant to try to establish a basis for fellowship with him on those grounds. It is not irrelevant because doctrine is not a sound basis for fellowship, but because Warren already doesn't agree that it is important so you (generic "you") are already not on the same page as him when you talk about doctrine as a basis for fellowship. This is no impediment for HIM because HE already discounts doctrine. And doctrine, PER SE is not really the problem with him so it is pointless to attempt to find legitimate grounds for fellowship with him on that basis. Consequently, to attack the issue from this angle is to miss the point entirely.

It is very frustrating to try to get this into words and I still feel my attempt has been inadequate.

Tragically, when it is a friend or trusted personality the cautions/mandates of Scripture are often brushed to the side for the sake of that unity. I suspect we are going to see that in this current situation with Piper/Warren.

One might think Piper’s belief the charismatic sign gifts are active and should be sought after today would be enough to cause a withdrawal of unity, but it has not.

Therefore, I suspect this will also be another, “let’s agree to disagree” moment. Unity at the expense of fidelity to Scriptures is a hallmark of the so-called conservative evangelical community.

Though I consider myself CE I agree there is an uncomfortably ecumenical bend within CE. Frankly, I found my late pastor's teaching on 1 Cor 1:10 (heard it just yesterday) to be pretty convicting in this regard, and then read your article just today and got whammied with the same thing. Unity at the expense of doctrine is lipstick on a pig and it will come back to haunt you.

At the same time, we certainly have to tolerate differing levels of maturity within our body, at which point I guess one must distinguish between "doctrine" and "conviction" as in the matter of eating meat offered to idols in Romans.

I have to run but would like to expand on this with you (plural) if you (Lou) don't think it's off topic.

You write:Al Mohler and Ligon Duncan have given Christian recognition to the deadly “enemies of the cross of Christ,” (Phil. 3:18).

Did you know Al Mohler is sharing the stage with Piper and Warren?

This is from Piper's website:

The 2010 Desiring God National Conference will take place, Lord willing, October 1-3 in Minneapolis. The conference theme is Think: The Life of the Mind & the Love of God, and the speakers and message titles are as follows:

Al Mohler - "The Way the World Thinks: Meeting the Natural Mind in the Mirror and in the Market Place"Rick Warren - "Thinking Purposefully for the Glory of Christ: The Life of the Mind and Global Reality"R. C. Sproul (via video) - "Thinking Deeply in the Ocean of Revelation: The Bible and the Life of the Mind"Thabiti Anyabwile - "Thinking for the Sake of Global Faithfulness: Confronting Islam with the Mind of Christ"Francis Chan - "Think Hard, Stay Humble: The Life of the Mind and the Peril of Pride"John Piper - "Thinking for the Sake of Joy: The Life of the Mind and the Love of God"

Yes, I was aware that Mohler and Sproul will appear alongside Warren. My understanding is that Piper's invite to Warren was after Mohler/Sproul agreed to appear and they were not consulted about it. IMO, Mohler, because of his own track record of ecumenical compromise won't have any problem with it. Sproul, probably won't care, but we'll see in October.

Rick Warren whispers the magic word "Edwards" in John Piper's ear and he gets invited to DesGod. What better shibboleth (or "Open, Simsim") could Warren have chosen to get Piper to open his doors?

Mike Horton wrote in response to Piper's invite of RW (April 1, 2010):

...Pastor Warren tailors his appeals to his audience. To Calvinists, he stresses his support for the “solas” of the Reformation... Rick Warren endorses a host of books, from New Age authors to Emergent writers to conservative evangelicals. So why not include Calvinists?...

And why not Westminster Seminary profs, too?

Dr. Horton apparently thought twice about his April condemnatory stance toward Rick Warren, since he participated in the June "Saddleback Conversation Gathering," held in the run-up to the October Lausanne Conference.*

Horton gives this cheery update from June 23rd:

I had a great time at the Lausanne “Global Conversation” held at Saddleback Church and hosted by its pastor, Rick Warren. It was a privilege to be part of a distinguished panel of evangelical leaders from a wide variety of backgrounds... It’s great to be able to discuss our differences as well as our common convictions in a spirit of friendship as well as mutual challenge. Our mission at White Horse Inn is to go to any forum that invites us where we have a chance to clarify what we are convinced is the proper message and mission of the church...

Dr. Horton apparently missed his own warning! He attacks Warren as a man-pleaser, and as a distorter of the gospel, and then strangely changes strategy, feeling "privileged" to speak at a conference hosted by Warren @ S-back!

If Warren is as nefarious as Horton painted him on April Fools Day, then Horton's embrace (literally) of Warren is akin to Luther calling the pope the antichrist one day and kissing his ring the next, or Paul hugging a Judaizer after writing that such should be "cut off" & ananthema!

See www.trinityfoundation.org/horror_show.php?id=51 for a piece the editor calls "Horton's Hypocrisy."

Yours for Christ & the gospel,Hugh McCann

* The list of endorsers of Lausanne is a who's-who of Evangelicaldom: Graham, Hayford, Orombi, Stott, Tada, & Warren, along with Campus Crusade, Evangelism Explosion, & The Navigators. Rick Warren and others promote the conference in short videos at www.lausanne.org/.

Question for you. Is there something wrong with MacArthur hosting a Christian rock band at an event? And if the Jonas Brothers are Christians, is there something wrong with them playing at Saddleback? Just curious on your line of thinking on those 2 "issues".

New From the Author

I have written the revised & expanded edition of In Defense of the Gospel to provide the biblical answers to Lordship Salvation. There are areas where one must balance soul liberty and Christian charity and agree to respect different views. The gospel, however, is not one of them. The works based theology of Lordship Salvation and its advocates must be vigorously debated, and biblically resisted. May God protect unsuspecting believers and the lost from the egregious errors of Lordship Salvation.

Followers

Copyright Notification

No part of this blog's articles may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means-electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or otherwise-without the prior written permission of the author(s), with the exception of brief excerpts in magazine articles and/or reviews.

Disclaimer

As a blog, this venue is open to comments by persons of differing opinions. The opinions expressed herein by various contributors do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of In Defense of the Gospel, or its owners.

Although we indulge differing opinions, we do not condone, and are not responsible for, any false or misleading statements of a libelous or defamatory nature. See 47 U. S. C. sec. 230 (c) (1).

Any slanderous remarks posted herein will be removed immediately upon notification of the offended party of specific untrue statements contained within a posted comment.